Gun control and the Colorado legislature (4 letters)

I am writing concerning the gun legislation passed by the Colorado House of Representatives last Monday. I am puzzled why any Democrat or Republican in the legislature is having difficulty voting to ban gun magazines over 15 rounds. It is beyond my comprehension that after the mass violence that has taken place in this country, with many innocent human beings — men, women and precious children — being killed, any lawmaker can be against banning all assault rifles and their magazines that ensure human destruction. Where are their priorities concerning human life? I say let’s value human life and ban all assault rifles and large-capacity magazines to individuals in this state and the country.

Linda Pavlak, Arvada

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

The gun-control legislation working its way through our legislature is ludicrous. None of proposed laws will affect the criminals or the mentally disturbed who have perpetuated the crimes the legislature is trying to address. But these laws do make criminals out of the law-abiding.

Most of the proposed laws are unenforceable without violating rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Laws must be constitutional, fair and enforceable. How does the state propose to enforce these laws?

It is understandable why many believe this is an attempt to chip away at the Second Amendment.

Steven Page, Lakewood

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

According to your article, state Rep. Ed Vigil, D-Fort Garland, voted against all four Democrat-sponsored bills related to responsible gun safety.

Mr. Vigil had this terrible conflict about how his family used guns in the Colorado of the 1850s: “They carried weapons to settle this land. This is part of our heritage. I cannot turn my back on that.” What vision and analysis. Hard to argue with such a deep level of understanding of the 21st century.

Perhaps he could play a role in the old “Rocky and Bullwinkle” segment starring Sherman and Mr. Peabody, get into their WABAC machine, and go back to the 1850s.

Cheryl and J. Craig Holland, Englewood

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

Promoting “common sense” or “rational” gun laws is a bad-faith attempt to impose structure on a world of phenomena that is fundamentally irrational and random, i.e., violent criminal conduct. Leftist politicians’ own rationality hinders them from finding meaning in freedom. To try to suppress their feelings of anxiety and dread, they confine themselves within their group think and thereby seek to suppress our freedoms and acquiesce to believing that simple structure and regulation will somehow affect the “bad guys” left among us who in fact will always choose to act irrationally and randomly. That is what defines them. The rest of us should be defined by our love of freedom so clearly recognized by our Founding Fathers and so well enumerated in our Bill of Rights.

Jerry Abts, Denver

This letter was published in the Feb. 24 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Linda, I have 20 magazines with a capacity greater than 15. The ban would not get rid of them. If the ban passes, it would only be a drive to Wyoming to get some. (Look at fireworks sales) Not to mention people would be selling them to each other, either though it would be illegal, because law enforcement wouldn’t know. It is an unenforcible law that will have no effect, except that a couple hundred people will lose their jobs.

Dano2

Of course you have mags all over the place.

Nevertheless, action is going to happen. Eventually the large cap clips [oops – don’t want gun nuts ululating about the wrong term!!] will degrade.

If kept unloaded, they last for decades. There are magazines out there for guns that are over a hundred years old and functioning fine. My mags will outlast me. You might want to do some materials research.

Dano2

Oh, I’m pretty sure the average scared white person doesn’t want a 100 year old mag when the dark hordes of gangbangers invade the suburbs looking for their TV and the wife’s cheap costume jewelry and lap dog’s rhinestone sweater.

Best,

D

thor

Another dig against blacks. What kind of liberal are you? Oh, that’s right, a typical liberal who only cares about minorities enough to buy their vote.

Dano2

What kind of liberal are you?

[/ignore]

I’m the type of person who knows which low-quality posters are making up scurrilous and low-wattage accusations. Maybe as a comedy routine to make people laugh, but still. It is made up. In a tawdry way.

Jus’ sayin cheap low quality tactics are cheap. And tawdry.

[ignore]

Best,

D

jayreadyjay

You do understand the concept of irony, don’t you? Because when it comes to cheap low quality tactics you are a master.

thor

So, you were just kidding when you talked about “dark hordes of gangbangers invade[ing] the suburbs.” Not very funny.

see! the “you don’t know anything about guns – therefore you’re stupid poopy-cahcah!’ -argument!” If 100 year old magazines are still functioning fine, why do the police and military replace their magazines ever few years? You wouldn’t want one of your twenty high capacity magazines to (gulp!) “fail” while in that gun battle with the gov’t National Guard storm trooper shoot out, would you! Any self-respecting gun owner, knows springs in magazines wear out and excessive wear can impede the magazine’s ability to work. (Jeez, some people just don’t know anything about guns – or physics!)

toohip

LOL, good one, Dano! You’re catching on to the gun advocates gamemanship! You can’t use a inappropriate “gun-term” or they’ll call you “unintelligent” and claim you don’t know what you talked about. “The detachable magazine is often controversially referred to as a clipor mag.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_(firearms)

disqus_an29jYPkvn

Linda, Steve, Cheryl & J Craig, & Dano; While acting as unpaid schills for your blind Democratic reps in the State Senate / House, have any of you given any thought what-so-ever to the folks & their families who are going to lose their livlihoods as a direct result of that “feel good, do nothing” legislation? Give that a little thought while you enjoy your evening cocktails & dinner wine, & get your kids ready to go to their unguarded schools on Monday morning.

Steve R

Are you kidding me based on Dbags posts and his ridiculous “Best D” at the end of every post, it’s highly unlikely he has ever dated a lady, let alone have a wife wife and kids! As for you Andy, there are many people with a lot of mags that keep your pathetic butt safe so before you insert foot in mouth maybe you should think. On second thought just shut the heck up…we are all tired of people like you and your liberal agenda!

andyandy

Who keeps my butt safe, and how? And from whom?

Right now, I depend on the police and the national guard to keep me safe from people like you, who have these insane ideas about “rising up” against some tyrannical government which exists only in their minds.

Don’t try to involve me in your ridiculous fantasies. You are completely unhinged.

thor

Not a very good argument. First of all, we can depend on the police to draw a chalk line around us after the fact. But they hardly ever prevent a murder. Second, people like Steve don’t fear the National Guard but they do fear the possibility that the government will get out of control and use the Guard to control society. Is that an unwarranted fear, probably. Is it unreasonable, maybe not. Last, the real unhinged people are those who get a gun, usually illegally, and kill others who are unarmed and defenseless.

toohip

Oooooooh, thor been reading those right wing conspiracy books about the gov’t coming to take his guns! Yeah, let’s create fear about our “militia!”? Isn’t that who the 2nd Amendment address should be “well armed?” (here’s where I get the proverbial religious interpretation of the 2nd Amendment and what it really means in weaponry today!).
Enlighten us, thor, how many of the recent mass shooters acquired their assault weapons. . . “illegally?” I keep hearing this argument, yet, it’s rubber than never meets the road, and at the same time you gunnies fight background checks intended to stop those from “illegally” acquiring guns – sound . . hypocritical?

thor

Oooooooh, TH, more incoherent rambling. But let me do my best to reply. 1. I figured, no matter how carefully I worded it, someone would misinterpret what I wrote. I suggested that people are afraid of government, but that it is probably unwarranted. 2. I’m not a “gunnie.” But I am someone who understands that one side is worried about their guns being taken from them and the other side is hastily passing emotionally based laws. 3. Are there not people who get their weapons illegally? Yes, there are. Its a fact that you can deny, but your denial won’t change things.

toohip

andy, this is the typical venting of the right when they don’t get their way, . . create more fear and loathing, and taking their ball and going home.

thor

Or, push for more laws with an emotional appeal.

GregoryR

Well if Dano lowered the bar in these forums with his childish antics, and he did, you just tossed it on the sewer. Bravo.

guest

And we’re tired of your stupid paranoid fantasies of you gun nuts thinking you’re Wyatt Earp! Come out of the wild wild west and join the real world stevie boy!

andyandy

So, we do nothing at all, is that it?

First of all, the simple fact that you have high-capacity magazines in such quantities is evidence of a mental illness. Second, we’ve been trying it your way, and it isn’t working out. Third, if it’s so easy to just go to Wyoming to circumvent the law, there should be criminal penalties for doing so, and you’ve made an excellent argument for a federal solution.

Get out of the way. You’re part of the problem. You should be behind bars.

DR

“…we’ve been trying it your way, and it isn’t working out.”

Exactly! Nothing you anti-gun loons has ever proposed or enacted has ever worked. Isn’t doing the same thing over and over again, hoping for a different result the definition of insanity? The “we must do something” argument is an ignorant appeal to emotion used by people not intelligent enough to understand the real problem.

toohip

and speed limits don’t prevent people from speeding, so let’s do away with them! Based on your analogy, we take down the speed limits, and everyone drives Humvees and arm themselves, I don’t know, rocket lauchers? to stop that “illegal” speeding car owner?

andyandy

Um…DR?

We’ve been trying it YOUR way, and it isn’t working out. YOu are the one you just accused of insanity.

Time to bone up on those reading skills!

toohip

andy, you’re raising the same argument the gun advocates make about “reasonable gun owners” who go “rogue” or are “mentally ill” and become “the bad guy with a gun!” Originally they were legal gun buyers, and reasonable owners,, then something snaps and they become evil. So how do we screen these people who act normal, but love guns and want to own them. . from acting out? Well the first response, is “mental illness background checks.” If the gun lobby is going to blame “people” and “mentally deficient people” then we need this kind of background check. Do you think they’ll support what they themselves propose? Walk the talk? Of course not, because they fear they might have some hidden mental deficiency a professional might detect and prevent them from buying that AR-15. I don’t know if the desire to own “20 high capacity magazines” for your assault style weapon is a sign of mental illness(do you really think tall boy’s magazines are for his “hunting”rifle?) but I believe even “reasonable” gun owners would question this desire, if not the right.

andyandy

There
is no distinction in law between the Aurora killer and all the people
who call themselves “responsible gun owners.” In other words, it’s up to
the rest of us to just trust them. We should just take their word for
it that they’re responsible, like we took his word. What could possible
go wrong?

toohip

want to explain your need for 20 high capacity magazines? Get too lazy to reload at the firing range? Bambi’s mother’s not going down after the first 15 rounds? Watching to many movies, and believe zombies, gangs, or jack-booted gov’t storm troops coming to take away your “liberties?” And if they’re banned and you drive to Wyoming to buy more, and bring them back – you’ve violated the law. Isn’t your claim you are a “law-abiding” gun owner? Oh, we can agree it will be hard to enforce, but “it’s the law!” right? The jack-booted police won’t come to arrest you hearing you have have high capacity magazines, but get caught do something other illegal, and they’re likely to add this charge. Decide tallboy, you going to continue to be “law abiding” in your gun ownership or are you on the side of the criminals?

Tom Smith

Dear Senators and Governer Hickenlooper,
While I may or may not be a direct constituent of yours, your vote greatly impacts my life. So much so that I feel compelled to plead my case. Emotions have no place in law! I sent letters to my representatives in the House, and its obvious I must expand my efforts.
Please do not allow emotions from the tragic events of the needless slaughter of children/people to cloud logical thinking. The issues involved reach far beyond the Second Amendment. In 2010, there were over 38000 deaths from overdoses, 60% of which involved prescription drugs. Factoring in the number of killings regardless of method which have involved prescription drugs (or the lack of) I firmly believe that the current proposed regulations passed by the House do not address the issues and are merely a bandaid to appease the hysteria. Multiple studies have detailed the multifaceted problems that result in these type of attacks, yet the only avenue that seems to garner any attention, attacks the law abiding firearm owner. This must stop! Until the correct and proper actions are taken, the only thing that will change is the type of weapon. An automobile can be very efficient at killing and injuring multiple victims, what would you propose then?

The recent exponential increase in the civilian purchase of firearms and related products would seem to be a true barometer of how your constituents truly feel.

The Constitution is a Charter that established a Trust between the People (Grantor) and the Government (Trustee). Please do not violate this Trust.

Thank you for your time and efforts as a public representative and for hearing me out. Please examine the facts as they exist and vote for the truth!

Respectfully,
Tom L. Smith
Montrose, Colorado.
81401

toohip

interpretation: Dear “my representatives” that I never voted for. . .
Pay no attention to the tens of thousands of violent gun deaths, including the 20 bullet-riddled bodies of the six year olds laying with their dead teachers in their own classroom. Ignore all these mass shootings of innocents, who weren’t “smart enough” to arm themselves against “legal, reasonable gun owners” . . who went “bad.”

We can “AFFORD” these types of deaths, but we as Republican gun owners care more about drug overdoses (well, just the ones by white people!). We feel that since more people die from other causes, you should pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, and stop picking on firearm carnage.

This is just hysteria and it will pass (we hope). My 2007 Ford Explorer is more dangerous than my assorted military style AR-15s with (twenty) 100 round capacity magazines, and my tens of thousands of rounds in preparation of when you and your your black president in the white house come to take my guns.

We on the right who own and love our weaponry, don’t have facts or statistics, let alone reality, on our side, but we do have a majority who feel we have the right to own every sort of weaponry legally manufactured. Remember it’s a “democracy” and since we have a majority on gun ownership, you lose.

And if that’s not convincing, it’s obvious in the 2nd (and 3rd?) Amendment of our Constitution, our forefathers wanted us to have semi-automatic military style weapons, with 100 round clips, er magazines, and all the firepower in the world to match up against an abusive gov’t with their F-22’s, aircraft carriers, tanks, and jack-booted Green Berets!

Thank you for hearing my veiled threat and my (ir)rational need for my weaponry. Please ignore the facts and statistics, and pay attention to who’s funding campaigns, or the NRA hit list. We vote, and we will vote our weaponry!

toohip

The gun idolaters seem to use the same tired old argument about any form of gun control – “it won’t have any affect, so why bother!” and “it makes the law-abiding gun owners criminals.”
Really? Don’t they make the same argument about speed limits – they aren’t proven to prevent speeding, so why not use the same argument and do away with them. That’s the absolute argument. There is statistics and reality that these gun control laws do make a difference ever so slight, but obviously not enough (feigned interest?) to sway the gunnies. And how does laws preventing criminals from having guns, ownership of 100 round magazines, illegally carrying a concealed firearm, and requiring payment of $12 for your own background check – make a “criminal” out of a “law-abiding” gun owner? Isn’t this the same group who cries “just enforce the laws already on the books?” So if they pass a law that says you must have a background check before buying a gun – and you don’t – you’ve broken the law, right? Is this too complex for the law abide-rs?

DR

Like I said…anti-gun arguments made by people simply not intelligent enough to understand the real problem. Example above…

Ron

Why vote yes on a law that can’t be enforced? HB 1229 makes myself or any other gun seller into a felon if we sell or trade guns between friends or family members. Sense? What kind of nazi bs like this is going to stop the next big media event? Not.

reinhold23

That’s why we need registration, too.

Jean Wall

Universal checks will help keep some guns out of the hands of disqualified people. Limiting magazines in and of itself would have some functional purpose, but the reality is that there are so many hi cap mags in private possession that current estimates are that it would take 3-4 decades to expend them. Restoring the assault weapons ban may have some impact on some types of crimes, notably the pseudocommando mass killer for whom the cosmetics of weapons and regalia play a part in their self-image and preparation for a crime.

The first issue we should be dealing with as a society in addressing our problem with gun violence is the degree to which AND THE DEGREE OF PURPOSEFULNESS with which the perception about gun related crime is being distorted to fit political agendas. We need a sober assessment of facts, we need a keen definition and understanding of terms (psycho pathology is not the same as psychosis). We also need to understand that there is no panacea and no single law is going to create some radical turn around in gun violence and gun deaths. The suicidal geriatric patient and the domestic batterer and the gang banger are driven by very different factors, yet these are among the most prevalent forms of gun violence. Some laws, taken in isolation, may not seem to be particularly useful, but a compliment of laws and measures could have a greater cumulative effect. Again ,we’re talking lives. Let’s at least try to get the facts of the matter clear in our minds and come up with practical, Constitutionaly sound addresses.

reinhold23

Steven, if you criminalize a behavior that was once legal, you by definition “make criminals out of the law-abiding.” Yours is an ineffectual argument that could have been made, for example, on behalf of alcoholics when driving under the influence was criminalized.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.

To reach the Denver Post editorial page by phone: 303-954-1331

Recent Comments

peterpi: I think I have this correct: Voters in Jefferson County elected school board members that the superintendent...

peterpi: Sounds good to me. For future employees. I believe police and fire dept. brass have also been known to get...